The survival of such "memorabilia" can only be achieved with help from Nazi sympathizers wishing to pass on the torch.

Bull. shiat.

How do you explain history without having any of the symbols to show? There's a heck of a difference between seeing 3x2" black and white picture in a history book and seeing the actual objects created by a culture of insanity. Owning such an object does not mean the owner automatically accepts and extols the ideals of the object's creator(s). The objects can serve as a reminder and a warning of what can happen if you let someone like Hitler remain in power.

I'm not saying Glenn Beck doesn't dress up in an SS uniform and choke himself while he jerks off but simply owning those objects doesn't mean he does.

Benevolent Misanthrope:On the other hand, this little display is a celebration, not historical preservation. It bears no relation to any historical study of the matter, aside from the physical presence of the artifacts.

Sorta CSB: A few years ago a relative was looking for furniture to match a quasi-antique they had, so my wife and I scoured the antique shops in various nearby towns to try and find a match. One weekend we visited 3 or 4 shops in southwestern Ontario, different towns all. But every store had a minor horde of Nazi memorabilia hidden away in the detritus. Some of it was well-aged and clearly of the proper vintage. Other stuff was bizarro-land home-made accent pieces, like a crocheted Kriegsmarine jack that had been lovingly framed. You see things like that and you wonder; a) what kind of antiques dealer thinks crap like that is worth presenting for sale, and b) do you really want the business from the kind of fruitcake that thinks it's worth buying?

I took a bunch of photos of the weirder stuff, but can't remember where I archived it on the LAN.

At the point you consider being a paranoid, right-winged neo-nazi who is thinly veiled as an entertainer better than being a member of a cartoon fandom, I don't think it's that fandom that needs to reevaluate their lives.

If you have some Nazi Luger or knife that grandpa pulled off a dead German, that's one thing, but if you have what could be called a collection? Yeah, you need help. Don't give me that "preserving history" crap. If you want to preserve history, give it to a museum.

remus:So, let me get this straight, some people believe all these artifacts should be destroyed and completely forgotten about? Yes, let's forget history so that we can repeat it. It's GOOD to keep these artifacts and display them. We NEED to be reminded about these horrors so that we can learn a lesson. There is a group of people who deny the whole thing even happened. If we get rid of these things, then how do we prove they are crazy and not correct? How do we remind our children of it to let them know not to repeat it?

I agree. If not black, then white. If we don't want to forget history, we must obsess over it. To acknowledge middle ground is to acknowledge that one day a black guy might be president.

jtown:The survival of such "memorabilia" can only be achieved with help from Nazi sympathizers wishing to pass on the torch.

Bull. shiat.

How do you explain history without having any of the symbols to show? There's a heck of a difference between seeing 3x2" black and white picture in a history book and seeing the actual objects created by a culture of insanity. Owning such an object does not mean the owner automatically accepts and extols the ideals of the object's creator(s). The objects can serve as a reminder and a warning of what can happen if you let someone like Hitler remain in power.

I'm not saying Glenn Beck doesn't dress up in an SS uniform and choke himself while he jerks off but simply owning those objects doesn't mean he does.

Why won't Glenn Beck answer accusations that he dresses up in an SS uniform and pays guys at the Home Depot to choke him while he jerks off in the shower? People are saying this is true. Why won't he answer these accusations?

Beck goes on about how big government sucks, while admiring Nazi Germany, which was all about centralized big government.

The term Nazi is a portmanteau of national and socialist. Education or job training were guaranteed to all Germans during the Nazi regime. Universal health care was instituted for all Germans. Job protections, including paid vacations, and old age pensions were guaranteed. The Nazis undertook massive public works projects, including mass transit and construction of the autobahn. On and on it went. This is what Hitler had to say about capitalism: "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions."Hitler thought more highly of the Soviets than he did of the Americans.

Yes, but when it came down to acts rather than words, Hitler kowtowed to the Krupps and Siemenses of Germany. Hitler knew that the army and the major corporate owners could destroy him, and he coopted them while still talking a lot of noise about destroying "capitalism." Nazi Germany had a large "socialist" public sector (like every modern country today), but they weren't anything like the Soviet Union.

MusicMakeMyHeadPound:staplermofo: I could see Glenn Beck in an old nazi jacket, the rest of the uniform strewn about his circular bed while he tries to combine masturbating and doing air guitar while staring at himself on the mirror on his ceiling.

I've seen some pretty sick porn on this here internet, but you, sir, have just put the poop frosting on the vomit cake.

You disgust me.

A friend of mine once wrote a Limbaugh/Beck snuff slash fic, just to prove he could. Don't think he put it online though.

TuteTibiImperes:remus: So, let me get this straight, some people believe all these artifacts should be destroyed and completely forgotten about? Yes, let's forget history so that we can repeat it. It's GOOD to keep these artifacts and display them. We NEED to be reminded about these horrors so that we can learn a lesson. There is a group of people who deny the whole thing even happened. If we get rid of these things, then how do we prove they are crazy and not correct? How do we remind our children of it to let them know not to repeat it?

I agree that preserving history is important, and we shouldn't try to white-wash the past, but it seems somehow wrong to be a personal collector, that almost crosses the line into admiration, sort of like people who collect serial killer memorabilia. Such items should belong to museums and historical societies, not personal collections IMO.

Beck goes on about how big government sucks, while admiring Nazi Germany, which was all about centralized big government.

The term Nazi is a portmanteau of national and socialist. Education or job training were guaranteed to all Germans during the Nazi regime. Universal health care was instituted for all Germans. Job protections, including paid vacations, and old age pensions were guaranteed. The Nazis undertook massive public works projects, including mass transit and construction of the autobahn. On and on it went. This is what Hitler had to say about capitalism: "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions."Hitler thought more highly of the Soviets than he did of the Americans.

Yes, but when it came down to acts rather than words, Hitler kowtowed to the Krupps and Siemenses of Germany. Hitler knew that the army and the major corporate owners could destroy him, and he coopted them while still talking a lot of noise about destroying "capitalism." Nazi Germany had a large "socialist" public sector (like every modern country today), but they weren't anything like the Soviet Union.

===========

It's true that Hitler backpedaled to appease the German industrialists....he needed them. It's also true that during the early years of the Nazi Party, Hitler instructed Nazi cadres to recruit new members from Germany's large communist party and not from the supporters of the Weimar regime.

remus:So, let me get this straight, some people believe all these artifacts should be destroyed and completely forgotten about? Yes, let's forget history so that we can repeat it. It's GOOD to keep these artifacts and display them. We NEED to be reminded about these horrors so that we can learn a lesson. There is a group of people who deny the whole thing even happened. If we get rid of these things, then how do we prove they are crazy and not correct? How do we remind our children of it to let them know not to repeat it?

We've already forgotten, or we never learned in the first place. The most important thing to remember is that what went on behind the gates of Auschwitz was CLASSIFIED. Just like Operation Phoenix, Operation Condor, and all the other CIA clandestine para-military programs. That, and the fact that, when Germans came back from the east and said that those "resettled" Jews were being murdered, everybody said they were lying. Our good, honest, Christian German boys wouldn't do things like that... we're the good guys.

At the point you consider being a paranoid, right-winged neo-nazi who is thinly veiled as an entertainer better than being a member of a cartoon fandom, I don't think it's that fandom that needs to reevaluate their lives.

At least the Nazis were snappy dressers. On the other side, we have this:

Newsflash re: ignorance: names are names, definitions can switch, and can be misappropriated to achieve certain goals.

Actually, the early Nazi party had strong socialist leanings. That was one of the major sources of tension between Roehm and Hitler; Roehm wanted an actual revolution to bring down the capitalists, and Hitler wanted more of a fascist-style autocracy with heavy government ties to privately owned corporations. Roehm lost that argument on the Night of the Long Knives, and there was no more talk about socialist revolution in Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany had much larger state involvement in the economy than "capitalist" countries, but the Fuehrer Prinzip is completely foreign to what the Reds were aiming for in their ideas of international socialism. Stalin had no ideology; he was just a gangster.

Defining state owned control / heavy government ties to privately owned corporations does not equal the definition of socialism currently levied against Obama. And the current definition of a 'socialist state' is more about workers having control, albeit in theory, communism works. In theory.

Anyway, my point was that current use of socialist as a derogatory term does not resemble what Hitler was going for, initially and especially later in the party. But you are technically correct and in that sense I appreciate your post. And totally agree about Stalin. I can have a begrudging respect for Lenin sometimes, - *sometimes*, - but not Stalin.

Newsflash re: ignorance: names are names, definitions can switch, and can be misappropriated to achieve certain goals.

Actually, the early Nazi party had strong socialist leanings. That was one of the major sources of tension between Roehm and Hitler; Roehm wanted an actual revolution to bring down the capitalists, and Hitler wanted more of a fascist-style autocracy with heavy government ties to privately owned corporations. Roehm lost that argument on the Night of the Long Knives, and there was no more talk about socialist revolution in Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany had much larger state involvement in the economy than "capitalist" countries, but the Fuehrer Prinzip is completely foreign to what the Reds were aiming for in their ideas of international socialism. Stalin had no ideology; he was just a gangster.

Defining state owned control / heavy government ties to privately owned corporations does not equal the definition of socialism currently levied against Obama. And the current definition of a 'socialist state' is more about workers having control, albeit in theory, communism works. In theory.

Anyway, my point was that current use of socialist as a derogatory term does not resemble what Hitler was going for, initially and especially later in the party. But you are technically correct and in that sense I appreciate your post. And totally agree about Stalin. I can have a begrudging respect for Lenin sometimes, - *sometimes*, - but not Stalin.

============

You believe that Hitler would have had any use for American style capitalism? Had Nazi Germany defeated the USA, I'm pretty sure Hitler would have had the Wall St types marched off to death camps in New Jersey.

One of my friends grew up next door to a man who had served in the German Army during WWII. My friend once asked him what he thought about American neo-Nazis. The old guy replied, "From what I see, most would never had made it through German Army training."

Beck goes on about how big government sucks, while admiring Nazi Germany, which was all about centralized big government.

The term Nazi is a portmanteau of national and socialist. Education or job training were guaranteed to all Germans during the Nazi regime. Universal health care was instituted for all Germans. Job protections, including paid vacations, and old age pensions were guaranteed. The Nazis undertook massive public works projects, including mass transit and construction of the autobahn. On and on it went. This is what Hitler had to say about capitalism: "We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all conditions."Hitler thought more highly of the Soviets than he did of the Americans.

Bears repeating. In the 30's, the Germans had had about enough of free-market capitalism under the Weimar Republic, which had gotten them nothing but crippling hyperinflation and rampant unemployment; on the other hand, they absolutely did not want Communism as it was being touted by the Stalinist regime to their east, with all property being publicly owned. So the Nazis invented a "nationalist-socialist" package designed to appeal to both sides--enough capitalism to keep the Ruhr industrialists happy, yet social-oriented enough to make the liberals comfortable with them. All it had to do was last long enough to get the Nazis into the Reichstag, which it did.

I'm torn between whether or not I should jump on the bandwagon about questioning Beck's motives, because the article writer is a clear example of how much of a twat one can look like when one jumps to conclusions for the sake of outrage attention whoring.

To start, I can't help wondering what prompted Beck to collect such macabre objects and include them among his personal belongings. What are the virtues of owning Göring's love letters, Hitler's signature or a few drops of his blood?

To be fair, history is history. If a museum had this stuff, people wouldn't think twice. It doesn't matter how important YOU think it is, collecting any piece of history, especially from an era where they tried so hard to wipe everything out, is important. Considering that Beck has apparently not tried to put any context to this though, seems to make it more about a personal collection than neutrally collecting things for their historical significance.

Surely, harboring such items adheres to a personality cult and suggests a sympathizer rather than a critic. The very presence of these objects begs the question: How does this material survive?

As I said above, it's all the context in how it is presented. Just throwing it together without any kind of explanation about WHY it is in the exhibit definitely makes it sound more like a happy collector though. I agree with that. It survives 2 ways: 1. Legitimate collectors, such as museums and even private collectors who save stuff, no matter how trivial, so we DO have a link to the past. 2. The Nazi sympathiser types who are excited and proud to own these things and like to show them off, even place them in some kind of shrine.

The proximity of the bloody handkerchief with Anne Frank's diary was deeply offensive, and insensitive to Salt Lake City's Jewish community. Among them are Holocaust survivors and their descendants, including myself, who found this profoundly distasteful.

Once again, it's about context. These things could be presented in the same exhibit, if done correctly. Done this way, and it doesn't really help any claims might make about not being a racist.

To add insult to injury, Beck's displays were met with complete apathy by the citizens of Salt Lake City. Visitors wound their way through the room in an almost robotic torpor, demonstrating neither revulsion nor too much interest either.

Yeah, they should have burned the hotel down, right? Have you stopped to think that many people didn't know what to expect, saw this stuff, and decided not to make a scene, since they really couldn't have done anything except draw bad press for themselves. It wouldn't have damaged Beck any more if there were picketers out front, and protesters pretty much get written off by the news media today and treated with disdain, no matter the cause. He's a private citizen in a free country, you want to have him arrested for having no taste?

Nor has there been any comment in the press or media.

I always like how a statement like this in in a story in the news media.

The Klan hood just fits with the rest of the tasteless stuff, but I'm not sure why the swastika banner is such a "bad" thing, considering it was used in the trials that brought justice to the Jewish people. Hell, that would be a cool thing to own, IMHO, the bad guy's flag flown at the place where they got their asses handed to them? It would be different if it was one of the flags flown at a concentration camp. To me, this is a symbol of the fall of the most notorious racists in history.

Newsflash re: ignorance: names are names, definitions can switch, and can be misappropriated to achieve certain goals.

Actually, the early Nazi party had strong socialist leanings. That was one of the major sources of tension between Roehm and Hitler; Roehm wanted an actual revolution to bring down the capitalists, and Hitler wanted more of a fascist-style autocracy with heavy government ties to privately owned corporations. Roehm lost that argument on the Night of the Long Knives, and there was no more talk about socialist revolution in Nazi Germany. Nazi Germany had much larger state involvement in the economy than "capitalist" countries, but the Fuehrer Prinzip is completely foreign to what the Reds were aiming for in their ideas of international socialism. Stalin had no ideology; he was just a gangster.

Defining state owned control / heavy government ties to privately owned corporations does not equal the definition of socialism currently levied against Obama. And the current definition of a 'socialist state' is more about workers having control, albeit in theory, communism works. In theory.

Anyway, my point was that current use of socialist as a derogatory term does not resemble what Hitler was going for, initially and especially later in the party. But you are technically correct and in that sense I appreciate your post. And totally agree about Stalin. I can have a begrudging respect for Lenin sometimes, - *sometimes*, - but not Stalin.

============

You believe that Hitler would have had any use for American style capitalism? Had Nazi Germany defeated the USA, I'm pretty sure Hitler would have had the Wall St types marched off to death camps in New Jersey.

My grandfather lived in pre-Third Reich Germany, between the wars, before he went to America (had my dad incredibly old). Most of his friends, who were the workers rights type, got shuffled off to random camps by the Nazis when they came into power. Agitators, etc. Whereas my grandfather was relatively lucky in just having to fight for basic workers rights when he was in the US.

So if the Wall St types agreed to be a means to an end? Certainly I can see them being an active and willing part of the regime. Sycophantic yes-men and all.

Sorry, he collects historic relics from racist assholes, and then doesn't bother to display them in a way that in no way separates them from a young woman who came to symbolize the killing and persecution of a race of people. You display it in a way that shows that you AREN'T a racist, and in a way that demonstrates that you know the difference between Anne Frank and Adolph Hitler, and then they ARE just historical relics, you throw all the shait together with no context, and you're either a clueless douchebag or a racist, Nazi loving douchebag.

mbillips:Yes, but when it came down to acts rather than words, Hitler kowtowed to the Krupps and Siemenses of Germany.

I think you have that backwards. The Krupps and Siemenses were happy to go along with Hitler, because he was keeping them in business. At the very beginning of the Third Reich, before he had completely consolidated his power, it is true that Hitler was wary of offending the military-industrial complex of Germany, but they never controlled him. By the time WWII broke out, though, he controlled them fairly completely. He didn't dance to their tune, they danced to his. Industrialists who didn't toe the line were sidelined or even arrested: Look at what happened to Fritz Thyssen.

Beck: Tomorrow, I meet Sarah Palin and family for the first time. I'm actually a little nervous - as she is one of the only people that I can see that can possibly lead us out of where we are. I don't know yet if she's strong enough, if she's well enough advised, or if she knows she can no longer trust anyone...

NephilimNexus:I'm torn between whether or not I should jump on the bandwagon about questioning Beck's motives, because the article writer is a clear example of how much of a twat one can look like when one jumps to conclusions for the sake of outrage attention whoring.